About your Search

20121112
20121120
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
doors is a different story. john boehner doesn't have the leverage he used to have. on a conference call he told house republicans they had to avoid the nasty showdowns that mark so much of the last two years. senate republican leader mitch mcconnell was the number one obstructionist in the president's first term. now he tells "the wall street journal" he'll do whatever it takes to get a deal. i'd be willing to pay the ransom if e we thought we were going to get the hostage out. but the hostage is what? entitlement spending. mcconnell's intention, he's willing to agree to a dollar of new taxes for every dollar in cuts. what a difference an election makes. >> i'm going to ask a question on the stage. they seau had a real spending cuts deal, 10 to 1. spending cuts to tax inkrecreas. spooker, you're already shaking your head. but who on this stage would walk away from that deal? would you raise your hand about not raising taxes. >> remember in 2011 republicans would not take a 10 to 1 tax cut deal? now today mitch mcconnell is willing to do a 1 to 1 deal. republicans lost all of their lever
to raising taxes on the rich? >> there's no question about it. john boehner was sounding, you know, like there might be some way to compromise on that issue. and i love bill crystal, what he had to say about it. who is somewhat of a leader of the more conservative branch of the republican party. so i'm optimistic. but we don't need all the republicans to go along. we need enough rational republicans and then the democrats can provide the rest of of the votes in we get a fair compromise. but anything less than fair that protects the middle class, the president has said he's not going to sign it. >> cynthia, the "new york times" reported on a conference call john boehner the speaker had and it's very interesting what tone he set and a gop senator. let me give you the quote p the quote from the "times" is that their party lost badly, mr. boehner said, they had to avoid the nasty showdowns that marked much of the last two years. members on the call subdued and dark, murmured words of support. that's interesting. and then you had senator bob corker, a key member of the banking committee, went
seem to be moving closer to a key sticking point. >> speaker boehner seemed to suggest that he was open to closing loopholes, to real tax reform. can you get there by just closing loopholes, or will it take more than that? >> well, look, i don't want to prejudge the discussions. i think that the speaker's comments have been encouraging and there is obviously money to be gained by closing some of these, closing some of these loopholes and applying them to deficit reduction. there are a lot of ways to skin this cat. gregg: illinois congressman peter roskam joins us. he is on the house ways and means committee. he joins us from chicago. good to see you. house speaker boehner says he will oppose any increase in tax rates. and the white house said on friday, and i will read this directly, the president will veto any bill that includes an extension of the current tax rates for those earning more than $250,000 a year. so congressman, where is the come promize? >> i think the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. we've heard this language coming from the white house before. we hea
of the united states. house speaker john boehner has less support each day for a hard line approach. republican opposition to tax increases is slipping in congress. anti-tax lobbyist grover norquist no longer as a majority of supporters in either chamber. "the hill" says newly elected republicans refuse to sign the anti-tax pledge during the campaigns and another handful of returning republicans have disavowed their alliance to the written commitment. it's about time. at least they paid attention to the election. today bobby jindal scolded the entire party for the approach to the economy. hold it right there. this comment, he sewer sounds like a democrat. we've got to make sure that weren't the party of big business, big banks, big wall street bailouts, big corporate loophole, big anything. we cannot be, we must not be the party that simply protects the rich so they get to keep their toys. bobby, come on over to the good side, dude. you're talking like a conservative democrat. momentum is on the president's side. he just needs to know how motivated his allies are. the hard work didn't end last
party should take president obama up on his offer. you have speaker boehner saying, let's get compromise. this is the time to bring that debt down. we seriously have to do it. i don't think anyone disputes that, but it has to be a mix of spending cuts and the revenue. and the one figure that i'd like to add here is how much revenue we get by just going back to the clinton levels at $250,000 and above. that's $700 billion in tenures. that's what draws people to that number when you add that in and then close some loopholes and subsidies and do the budget cuts, we have already done a trillion. you can get to the $4 trillion that most economists say would at least lead us to the path to reduce debt over ten years. >> because it is so much money and because it would be so relatively painless for people who have income above $250,000 to see that change go back, because bill crystal is saying this now, because the president is clear that's what he's running on, it feels that's clear that's within the realm of the possible. but what else didn't previously peel like it was in the realm of possib
. former lt. governor of new york. and author of decoding the obama health law. john boehner said it is now the law of the land. good to see you. biggest colonel to me, my family and to people out there watching. will my quality of care care change? >> first of all, you may lose the plan you get on your job. and you may lose full-time job status as a result. this law says that employers. >> is this all of it. >> this is all of it. >> we like our guests to bring us cake not 2,000 pages of healthcare legislation. >> unfortunately this is what you have got. this law says that employers with 50 or more full-time workers have to provide health insurance. not just any health insurance but the one size fits all government designed plan. that cost almost twice as much as what many employers currently provide. so, as a result. employers in many cases are going to drop the coverage and may even move their full-time employees into part time status to avoid the penalty. >> we have already seen companies doing that. >> that's right. and the government actually predicts that under this employer mandate,
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)